Europe is my playground
-
Posts
61 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Annual Subscriptions
Media Demo
Posts posted by Europe is my playground
-
-
19 minutes ago, sfran43 said:
So 205M final + 15M max in Japan = weak 220M in the best case scenario.
1917 is at 347M, headed towards 375/380, will need a China release to pass 400M , but a very good run anyways
-
43 minutes ago, sfran43 said:
Not bad for Portrait. Film has been doing better internationally than in its native France where it barely made a blip.
-
1 hour ago, Madhuvan said:
Wtf is happening to BOP 😱
I am seeing positive wom on social media. It is very Infuriating.
The movie is actually good. I f**ng hate the alt right youtubers.
The Power of alt-right youtubers, lol
How about the movie is only good for a small woke twitter bubble but mediocre and unappealing for almost everyone else ?
Terrible marketing didn't help of course.
Bad opening, bad legs, bad run in the US and abroad: unmitigated flop
-
1
-
1
-
-
48 minutes ago, The GOAT said:
Why wasn't this masterpiece nominated for a single Oscar this year?
Did A24 not have enough money to shell out to voters for dumb "For your Consideration" Ads?
Imo, Sandler could've contended for Best Actor.I bet they hate Sandler for making all those Grown Up Movies.
I think A24 fucked up big time. Not securing at least a best pic nom for one of the 2 or 3 best films of the year when you have ten possible slots is just maddening. Sandler should have been a lock among best actor noms.
-
Enough with the depressing Birds of Prey stuff. Am I the only one who thinks Fantasy Island will overperform ?
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, DAJK said:
Is it just me or is that an amazing overseas number for Bad Boys? Increased from last weekend (opened in new territories but still). Does anyone else think 200M overseas might be in play?
It still has to open in Brazil, Italy and Japan, and has secured a tbd China release. 200M+ is very much at play, possibly more if it clicks with Chinese (in the case Evil Bats Virus don't kill them all before)
-
1
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, reddevil19 said:
That was just an unintended by-product of the de-ageing effects...
The weird love/power triangle between Pesci, Pacino and Paquin is one of my favourite thing in the film
-
47 minutes ago, reddevil19 said:
That was just an unintended by-product of the de-ageing effects...
😁no Pesci is just a legend
(the de-ageing did take a toll on De Niro's perf tho, poor guy looked like a distraught cyborg for half the film, the drawback of casting a 70 years old italian to portray a 35 years old irish guy. But he redeems himself in the end)
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:
Thanks for the links and such.
What Id note (and this is more wider point than specifically refuting what you said) when it came down to the actual first hand evidence, the people writing on social media have the right to say what they said...and also they arent actually talking about the movie promoting violence- perhaps in a general societal way but not in terms of actually inciting mayhem - its very much the narrative made by the article itself and the trades that seem to be deliberately hyping and overhyping any potential "threat" or perception of threat which of course means that everyone, from moviemaker to critic to regular guy or gal on twitter is being all simultaneoulsy misrepresented in the name of sensationalism.
I dont think Ive ever seen a more 'normal' movie be accused of being controversial.
With the comedy, I dont know....I mean The Day Shall Come came out last year with some major names in and ticks pretty much anti-woke box one can come up with. I dont see it....all I see is maybe some people arent getting big budgets for comedies any more because they're perceived as more of a risk unless they come across as appealing to everyone simultaneously, which is less wokeness and more standard studio small-c conservativism/anti risk tendencies. Whenever I see someone say "you cant...x...these days" it seems theres always someone already out there doing it. Jerry Sadowitz, Brendan Burns, Jim Jeffreys, Roy Chubby Brown (sorry for Uk centric references) theyre all out there just as they always have been.
I probably need to watch Hollywood again. Im just so fed up with films about Hollywood/filmmaking/LA and that Ive put a mental line in the sand about it. It impacted the enjoyment of Marriage Story for me as well.
Irishman was beautifully made but it gave me nothing to relate to, as someone who didnt see myself anywhere in the film there was nothing that made me care on any level - contrasted with Ford v Ferrari where I have even less in common with the characters but which had me absolutely invested in every last person in the film.
Haven't seen Ford vs Ferrari, because I don't care about cars and I'm perhaps unfairly (I haven't seen all his movies) biased against James Mangold, my bad, you're not the first person to tell me it's really good.
And I also have nothing in common with irishmen, italian mafia or union bosses in 20th century United states (😉) but i can't get off my mind the ominous gleam in Joe Pesci's eyes when he stares at Anna Paquin, among other things I truly enjoyed in the movie.
-
43 minutes ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:
I suppose I mean a combination of Phillips refusing to engage in much discussion about the film, when he has made a movie that is clearly intended for discourse. His comments about wokeness in comedy as well come across as remarkably trite coming from the guy whose last two contributions to the genre were The Hangovers 2 and 3 - if it came from someone like Chris Morris, David Chappelle or Armando Iannucci fine, but not from someone who has made a fortune from bland broad fare. Just came across as chatter bait, and indeed as chatter bait it worked.
WAS there genuinely a real argument that the film would incite mayhem? I keep seeing this accusation but, maybe becasue Im not paying enough attention, I never actually saw anybody claim this outside of literally a couple of attention seekers on twitter. It again seemed all more like an atgempt to contrive controversy rather than actually have it - if anything I think Joker would have benefitted from a bit more boldness, bravery and statement from Phillips, not less.
For the record I think its good not great. I'd put it 5th out of the 8 nominees Ive seen (Parasite doesnt open in UK yet) above Irishman, OATIH and Marriage Story. Lots of promise from Phillips and an incredible central performance and score alongside indisputed public appeal, but many flaws and somewhat patchy for sure.
I agree with Phillips about the disastrous effect of wokeness on comedy, and have no reason to doubt his sincerity, whatever the quality of his previous films.
About the "potential danger" narrative of the film, this article sums it up pretty well. https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/9/18/20860890/joker-movie-controversy-incel-sjw
Then type Joker+Security concerns on Google to see that this internet/media narrative also had consequences in the real world, which was widely reported...
For the record, I think Irishman and OATIH are WAY better than Joker (and Parasite also) but I'd agree with you on that: if anything I think Joker would have benefitted from a bit more boldness, bravery and statement from Phillips, not less.
-
6 hours ago, Ipickthiswhiterose said:
It depends what you mean by 'divisive'.
If by 'divisive' you mean 'controversial': That's an extremely tiny minority of idiots on the internet making the movie out to be far more interesting than it is, albeit on the back of Todd Phillips saying some dumb nonsense and obfuscating the purpose of his own film in interviews that in hindsight turned out well for him
If by 'divisive' you mean 'finds it somewhat overrated, rests entirely on one tour de force performance, and certainly has no business being nominated for awards like costume design, sound editing and hair and makeup.....then I don't see what's woke or sect like about that. Just seems a pretty ordinary opinion.
I have no knowledge of Todd Phillips saying dumb nonsense, what are you talking about ?
And by divisive I indeed meant "controversial" (the idea that the film would incite mayhem and the fake outrage about it being was an alt-right manifesto or whatever the click-bait obsessed woke brigade blamed the film for).
General audiences liked it (the insane legs, 8,6 on Imdb...), and clearly members of the Academy liked it too.
I personally am not a super-fan of the film, I find it ultimately a bit shallow and too derivative, although Phoenix perf makes you forget that at times.
-
Joker did 1B+ at the box-office, in part thanks to great world of mouth, it won Golden Lion at Venise, 11 Oscars nominations including Picture, director, and screenplay... It's only divisive in a small woke, sect-like chamber of the internet. Never overestimate the number of these people, including among the voting members of the academy
-
2
-
-
In The Guardian, of all rags!!!
That's refreshing.
"Men’s supposed lack of interest in Little Women became the dominant narrative of the movie, implying it reveals the (alleged) lack of interest men have, in the words of the New York Times, in “see[ing] women as human beings”.
It couldn’t possibly be that Little Women is just a bad movie – although it is. Little Women is one of those books that has been over-adapted, with five previous film adaptations, plus a miniseries, plus a theatrical production, plus an anime version, and on and on.
The book itself is sentimental and sloppy, although interesting in the way it portrays hardship and deprivation. Its mediocrity makes mysterious its continued cultural dominance. Somehow the version adapted and directed by Greta Gerwig ramps up the sentimentality and strips the story of anything of interest. In her version, poverty looks glamorous, advocacy means just having the right opinions, and there are no consequences for anyone’s actions. At one point, I slid so far down in my chair to avoid looking at the screen and the incredibly painful things that were happening – painful to me, not to the characters – that I was nearly sitting on the floor."
-
1
-
-
11 minutes ago, Arendelle Legion said:
Hogwarts Awakens will do 2.5B in 2025, but The Rise of Potter will do just 1.3B or so in 2029
I predict a 267M opening week-end in November 2026 (732M WW)
65% drop the next week-end, but a 590M finale in the US nonetheless and 1,35B overseas: 1,94B total.
You read it here first.
-
3 minutes ago, RealLyre said:
the editing snub for OUATIH is the most shocking for me, but I feel like as long as Hollywood wins the PGA next week (which also uses the same preferential ballot system as the best picture Oscar) its best picture chances will be fine.
It's weird I have the feeling that OUATIH could very well leave empty-handed save for Pitt.
I suspect Parasite, 1917 and Joker are the most likely winners for Best Picture & Director.
I see something like
Parasite BP/ Mendes BD
Or
Joker BP / Bong BD
Or
Joker BP&BD
-
2 minutes ago, filmlover said:
Love her.
Slightly creeped out by the fact that Zach Braff probably took this picture
-
17 minutes ago, MrGlass2 said:
But will a Harry Potter or LOTR "reboot" in 30 years make a ton of money? I think so, and you can mock me then if I'm wrong.
I doubt we'll have to wait 30 years for a new Potter, and yes it will be huge.
-
1 minute ago, Ithil said:
No she doesn't.
Brooklyn, The Seagull, Chesil Beach, Mary Queen of Scotts, LadyBird, Little Women, a festival of boredom.
She makes movies for old ladies. A niche that guarantees her awards nom, but zero risk.
I do think she's better than that.
-
2
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, Ithil said:
Everyone thought that of Mary Queen of Scots early on too but it ended up being kind of a nothing film in a busy category year. So I won't make predictions this far out, but I can safely expect No. 5 (and hopefully an actual win) at some point soon.
She's good but she makes boring choices
-
16 minutes ago, DAJK said:
The DiCaprio nomination imo is a Joke. I didn't see Pain and Glory so I won't say whether Banderas should be there or not, but Pryce or DiCaprio shoulda been replaced with Taron
Banderas is absolutely wonderful in Pain and Glory; he really creates a singular character and I've never seen him so good. It's real "actor's work", although not on the showy side. My favourite perf this year (along with Phoenix in Joker, Pesci in Irishman, Jeremy Strong in Succession and Jodie Comer in Season 2 of Killing Eve).
-
1
-
-
Objective Best Pictures & Directors:
1- The Masters Club
Bong
Scorcese
Tarantino
2- The Wannabe Masters
Waititi
Mendes
Phillips
3- The Boring Good Students with extra woke points
Gerwig
Baumbach
4- The James Mangold
James Mangold
-
1
-
-
Happy for Parasite (a supporting nom would have been great tho): best picture winner in the making ?
Happy for Banderas (best performance of the year imo; although still disappointed that Pain and Glory was never part of the conversation for Picture and Director, it's really a wonderful film)
Happy that J.Lo is out (c'mon she's no actress) and that they didn't cave to pressure concerning Gerwig and Awkwafina.
-
2 minutes ago, BestPicturePlutoNash said:
95 is less than 100m. That’s just a fact. You said it made 100m in your answer and it didn’t.
Ok I give up. Little Women is an unmitigated triumph and Rise of Skywalker the ultimate proof of the trilogy's consistency.
Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, BestPicturePlutoNash said:
Abbey missed 100m
don't be dense, Little women at 105M won't be a bigger success than Downton Abbey at 95 (especially since it costed twice as much)
-
2
-
1
-
The Invisible Man | Feb 28 2020 | Will be available on VOD Friday March 20
in Box Office Discussion
Posted
also gay and curious about what the hell is "gay appeal"
should gays "enjoy" a movie just as long as it's gay-friendly ?